Lyon and Pattinson overlooked for World T20

Nathan Lyon and James Pattinson will not be part of Australia's squad for the ICC World Twenty20 after surprisingly being left out of the 30-man preliminary group. Rob Quiney and Glenn Maxwell are the only men in the squad who have not played for Australia in any format, and Maxwell's odds of being taken to Sri Lanka for the world tournament have shortened dramatically with the omission of his fellow offspinner Lyon.

In February, the national selector John Inverarity said Australia were planning to take Brad Hogg, Xavier Doherty and Lyon to the World T20, to be held in spin-friendly conditions. Lyon, who made his name in T20 for South Australia, was part of Australia's squad in the West Indies but did not make his T20 international debut, and collected one wicket in his two ODI appearances.

He has now been overlooked for Maxwell, 23, who is expected to make his debut on the upcoming tour of the UAE and is the only right-arm finger-spinner in the 30-man squad, while the legspinner Steven Smith is also part of the group. Maxwell offers a superior all-round package to Lyon, given his powerful striking and athletic fielding, but he has not yet displayed the wicket-taking ability of Lyon, who appears now to be viewed by the selectors as a Test specialist.

Just as surprising was the decision to omit Pattinson, who has played four T20s for Australia over the past year. Although his economy rate of eight is higher than the selectors would ideally like in the shortest format, Pattinson would still have expected to be part of the 30-man group, but he has instead been squeezed out while the selectors have chosen Dirk Nannes, who has not played for Australia in nearly two years, and the seamer Ben Laughlin.

Nannes, 36, is in far from career-best form, having picked up four wickets in nine matches for Surrey in the county T20 competition this year, and Laughlin, 29, has not played for Australia in more than three years. However, Laughlin's accurate style might suit the Sri Lankan pitches. There was no place in the group for Peter Siddle or Doug Bollinger, who have played for Australia in T20s in the past two years, or Phillip Hughes, who is currently the leading run scorer in the Friends Life t20 competition in England.

"The ICC World Twenty20 will be a fiercely contested tournament," Inverarity said. "A great deal of flamboyant cricketing talent will be on display and some games will be turned on their heads by 10 minutes of brilliance. The squad announced today is full of talent, enterprise and all-round strength. Within the 30 players named is depth and cover for all departments within the team."

Who cares if they named a 30 man squad or not, short term WC doesn't matter, long term, that's why they reduced national contracts.Did argus do the other countries who named 30 man squads, South Africa probably have the same amount of first class sides as Australia? When it comes down to it, hopefully the final 15 are more in line with who has performed well in T20 but you also have to consider the conditions that the WC is being played in too. Perhaps it's harder to bring in guys from outside a preselected squad so you're at a disadvantage for naming fewer. Yes you have to factor in statistics and records but also it'll help to pick a squad that does well in sub continent conditions. Hence I would go Warner, S Marsh, Watson, White, M Hussey, D Hussey, Maxwell, Wade, M Marsh, O'Keefe, Hogg, Laughlin, Johnson, Cummins, McDonald. All are excellent in the field (Cummins perhaps needs more work), in T20 that's crucial. Statistics don't usually give an idea of fielding ability or runs saved

Christopher
on July 21, 2012, 15:16 GMT

Finally with due respect @Meety, England has 18 Counties from which it selects the national sides.That's 198 playing personnel on-field at any given time. Selecting 30 of those represent 15% of the on field players. Australia has 6 States from which it selects the national side.That's 66 playing personnel on-field at any given time. Selecting 30 of those represents 45% of the on-field players or the equivalent of 3 times as many as England.The purpose of Argus was to encourage a return to practices that promoted performance. Surely the best method of accomplishing that is to name 17-20 players.Those who aren't announced will know that being outside the squad requires them to lift their efforts.What information of value is contained in announcing a bloated preliminary squad?One of the core precepts of progress is exactness through identifying parameters and standards.It gives terms of reference,allows regulated measurement over time & defines excellence.Best of all,it creates certainty.

Christopher
on July 21, 2012, 14:53 GMT

I'm surprised to find you weakening your case by excusing one countries behaviour with anothers @Meety. There is no relevance between Pakistans choices, Zimbabwes choices & anybody else. Each countries practices stand in their own right as either having value or otherwise,individually-not en bloc.It is entirely possible that Pakistan could win the World Cup based on their processes,regardless of perceptions.Hodge wasn't chosen for the last World Cup despite having a peerless record at domestic level.Australia were sub-standard and the selections and processes were subject to scrutiny and justifiable criticism by Argus.Recent changes have included fewer CA contracts.It's not unreasonable to expect that selection processes will reflect this crystalisation in reduced squad sizes,demonstrating a better focus by selectors & communicating it to the players and public.If the only action is to replicate previously failed processes,one can hardly anticipate success.Progress requires leadership.

Andrew
on July 21, 2012, 12:34 GMT

@hyclass - point of order re: "...The naming of the size of the squad demonstrates the selection panel have little idea what direction to take & are leaving themselves as many options as possible." - read the news mate, 19th July "WI name Benn in 30-man squad", "Kallis and Smith slated for T20 comebacks" (that's a 30 man squad), on the 18th July - "Pietersen out of World Twenty20 squad" (another 30 man squad), also "Yuvraj, Mandeep Singh among World T20 probables" Of the Test nations, only Pakistan DID NOT name a 30 man squad - & let's be honest, they are NEVER a model for consistency. Zimbabwe haven't named a squad at all as far as I'm aware. So your comment - which looks like a bit of cut n paste from another article, is way off the mark. Regarding Hodge - there are articles on him, indcating, he only ever thought his chances were as a replacement for Ponting. Also - he pulled out of a match thru injury on the eve (Pomersbach match). These are opportunities he did NOT take!

Christopher
on July 21, 2012, 3:20 GMT

I recall Brad Hodge being named in a similar sized squad not long ago.His omission despite being Australia's best performed player in those formats over a number seasons,saw his retirement.It was intended to give the impression of fair mindedness and inclusivity, but proved to be an advertising exercise.The naming of the size of the squad demonstrates the selection panel have little idea what direction to take & are leaving themselves as many options as possible.The recent & publicly stated policy of selecting under performing players like Forrest & Smith in the ODI side,apparently with a view to the future is an admission of a rudderless panel. Inverarity confessed as much publicly in Eng which showed poor judgement as the series was still in progress.None of this would have been necessary had CA not spent the last 5 years undermining traditional cricket processes to make BBL seem more appealing.This is not the consequence of cyclical behaviour but determined interference in process.

Hector
on July 20, 2012, 8:00 GMT

Out of this squad, I would go with Warner, Watson, Finch/White, Quiney, M. Hussey D.Hussey McDonald, Maxwell, Wade, Harris/Cummins, Mackay/Starc. Basically, we bat all the way to 10. We have 4 quicks and 3 spinning options. I would rotate Mackay, Starc, Cummins and Harris. All batsman in this squad are capable of causing satellite disruption with the exception of M. Hussey. Watson & MacDonald together would be a strong bowling combination... McDonald's presence would take pressure off Watson and allow him to bowl a little more aggressively.

Andrew
on July 19, 2012, 23:59 GMT

@Chris_P - I like Copeland, I like the fact that somehow with his slight (albeit TALL) frame, he seems to be able to bowl 30+ overs in a day & maintain accuracy. His first few List A games he got tonked, but he seems to be improving. My comment before was solely on the basis of 2 wicketless games is not a sample size large enuff(IMO) to push for T20 selection. As I said before - would of loved to see him tour with the A-side, but in place of who?

Peter
on July 19, 2012, 8:31 GMT

@Meety. I hear what you're saying about Copeland. I was only thinking that his outstanding efforts in SL last season. I did see him on couple of occasions & he did bowl without luck. The Aussie conditions don't appear to suit him as well as other bowlers, but we need to select players who will perform over there. not here. I also agree his type of bowling would be awesome over in England.

Marcio
on July 19, 2012, 8:13 GMT

@Always-positive, I have just gotten off the phone to the school board, and have arranged the firing of your former geography teacher. The UAE is not moving to the sub-continent anytime soon ;-)

Roo
on July 19, 2012, 6:25 GMT

@waughjunior & others... Copeland?... lol... Tell me his BBL record... Look at the better bowlers with most wkts - Starc, Hogg, Faulkner, McKay, Krejza, Coulter-Nile, McDermott... Try the Ryobi Cup - McDermott, Starc, Krejza, Haberfield, Faulkner - while Copeland 24th in the wkts list... I can see why Starc, Faulkner, Hogg have been included in the squad, while McDermott & Krejza were unlucky... Copeland looks more comfortable in the longer formats...

Garry
on July 21, 2012, 23:09 GMT

Who cares if they named a 30 man squad or not, short term WC doesn't matter, long term, that's why they reduced national contracts.Did argus do the other countries who named 30 man squads, South Africa probably have the same amount of first class sides as Australia? When it comes down to it, hopefully the final 15 are more in line with who has performed well in T20 but you also have to consider the conditions that the WC is being played in too. Perhaps it's harder to bring in guys from outside a preselected squad so you're at a disadvantage for naming fewer. Yes you have to factor in statistics and records but also it'll help to pick a squad that does well in sub continent conditions. Hence I would go Warner, S Marsh, Watson, White, M Hussey, D Hussey, Maxwell, Wade, M Marsh, O'Keefe, Hogg, Laughlin, Johnson, Cummins, McDonald. All are excellent in the field (Cummins perhaps needs more work), in T20 that's crucial. Statistics don't usually give an idea of fielding ability or runs saved

Christopher
on July 21, 2012, 15:16 GMT

Finally with due respect @Meety, England has 18 Counties from which it selects the national sides.That's 198 playing personnel on-field at any given time. Selecting 30 of those represent 15% of the on field players. Australia has 6 States from which it selects the national side.That's 66 playing personnel on-field at any given time. Selecting 30 of those represents 45% of the on-field players or the equivalent of 3 times as many as England.The purpose of Argus was to encourage a return to practices that promoted performance. Surely the best method of accomplishing that is to name 17-20 players.Those who aren't announced will know that being outside the squad requires them to lift their efforts.What information of value is contained in announcing a bloated preliminary squad?One of the core precepts of progress is exactness through identifying parameters and standards.It gives terms of reference,allows regulated measurement over time & defines excellence.Best of all,it creates certainty.

Christopher
on July 21, 2012, 14:53 GMT

I'm surprised to find you weakening your case by excusing one countries behaviour with anothers @Meety. There is no relevance between Pakistans choices, Zimbabwes choices & anybody else. Each countries practices stand in their own right as either having value or otherwise,individually-not en bloc.It is entirely possible that Pakistan could win the World Cup based on their processes,regardless of perceptions.Hodge wasn't chosen for the last World Cup despite having a peerless record at domestic level.Australia were sub-standard and the selections and processes were subject to scrutiny and justifiable criticism by Argus.Recent changes have included fewer CA contracts.It's not unreasonable to expect that selection processes will reflect this crystalisation in reduced squad sizes,demonstrating a better focus by selectors & communicating it to the players and public.If the only action is to replicate previously failed processes,one can hardly anticipate success.Progress requires leadership.

Andrew
on July 21, 2012, 12:34 GMT

@hyclass - point of order re: "...The naming of the size of the squad demonstrates the selection panel have little idea what direction to take & are leaving themselves as many options as possible." - read the news mate, 19th July "WI name Benn in 30-man squad", "Kallis and Smith slated for T20 comebacks" (that's a 30 man squad), on the 18th July - "Pietersen out of World Twenty20 squad" (another 30 man squad), also "Yuvraj, Mandeep Singh among World T20 probables" Of the Test nations, only Pakistan DID NOT name a 30 man squad - & let's be honest, they are NEVER a model for consistency. Zimbabwe haven't named a squad at all as far as I'm aware. So your comment - which looks like a bit of cut n paste from another article, is way off the mark. Regarding Hodge - there are articles on him, indcating, he only ever thought his chances were as a replacement for Ponting. Also - he pulled out of a match thru injury on the eve (Pomersbach match). These are opportunities he did NOT take!

Christopher
on July 21, 2012, 3:20 GMT

I recall Brad Hodge being named in a similar sized squad not long ago.His omission despite being Australia's best performed player in those formats over a number seasons,saw his retirement.It was intended to give the impression of fair mindedness and inclusivity, but proved to be an advertising exercise.The naming of the size of the squad demonstrates the selection panel have little idea what direction to take & are leaving themselves as many options as possible.The recent & publicly stated policy of selecting under performing players like Forrest & Smith in the ODI side,apparently with a view to the future is an admission of a rudderless panel. Inverarity confessed as much publicly in Eng which showed poor judgement as the series was still in progress.None of this would have been necessary had CA not spent the last 5 years undermining traditional cricket processes to make BBL seem more appealing.This is not the consequence of cyclical behaviour but determined interference in process.

Hector
on July 20, 2012, 8:00 GMT

Out of this squad, I would go with Warner, Watson, Finch/White, Quiney, M. Hussey D.Hussey McDonald, Maxwell, Wade, Harris/Cummins, Mackay/Starc. Basically, we bat all the way to 10. We have 4 quicks and 3 spinning options. I would rotate Mackay, Starc, Cummins and Harris. All batsman in this squad are capable of causing satellite disruption with the exception of M. Hussey. Watson & MacDonald together would be a strong bowling combination... McDonald's presence would take pressure off Watson and allow him to bowl a little more aggressively.

Andrew
on July 19, 2012, 23:59 GMT

@Chris_P - I like Copeland, I like the fact that somehow with his slight (albeit TALL) frame, he seems to be able to bowl 30+ overs in a day & maintain accuracy. His first few List A games he got tonked, but he seems to be improving. My comment before was solely on the basis of 2 wicketless games is not a sample size large enuff(IMO) to push for T20 selection. As I said before - would of loved to see him tour with the A-side, but in place of who?

Peter
on July 19, 2012, 8:31 GMT

@Meety. I hear what you're saying about Copeland. I was only thinking that his outstanding efforts in SL last season. I did see him on couple of occasions & he did bowl without luck. The Aussie conditions don't appear to suit him as well as other bowlers, but we need to select players who will perform over there. not here. I also agree his type of bowling would be awesome over in England.

Marcio
on July 19, 2012, 8:13 GMT

@Always-positive, I have just gotten off the phone to the school board, and have arranged the firing of your former geography teacher. The UAE is not moving to the sub-continent anytime soon ;-)

Roo
on July 19, 2012, 6:25 GMT

@waughjunior & others... Copeland?... lol... Tell me his BBL record... Look at the better bowlers with most wkts - Starc, Hogg, Faulkner, McKay, Krejza, Coulter-Nile, McDermott... Try the Ryobi Cup - McDermott, Starc, Krejza, Haberfield, Faulkner - while Copeland 24th in the wkts list... I can see why Starc, Faulkner, Hogg have been included in the squad, while McDermott & Krejza were unlucky... Copeland looks more comfortable in the longer formats...

Andrew
on July 19, 2012, 4:52 GMT

@Chris_P - normally like your comments, but Copeland for a T20 squad? All due respect but Copeland has played just TWO T20 matches in his career, is wicketless in the format with a E/R over 11! I wouldn't consider him for ODI honours yet either, he is improving in List A's but he is way behind a lot of others. In regards for Tests, I think he needs to be seriously re-considered, I think he COULD be lethal in England. I suppose J Bird's incredible debut season gave him the jump on Copeland? I am hoping should the A-tour bowlers fail to live up to expectations, maybe he'd be back in the frame!

Aaquib
on July 19, 2012, 1:58 GMT

Doherty should play all matches...he is a very gud Left Arm Spinner....much will depend on him in SL condition for aus

clint
on July 19, 2012, 1:25 GMT

What has Trent Copeland done wrong? He has gone from taking the new ball in tests against Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka to not even getting a mention in 30 man squad to play a bit of baseball(sorry T20 cricket) on the sub continent. I still don't understand some recent selections from this lot..

Dummy4
on July 19, 2012, 0:15 GMT

Looks to me that the present selectors have followed the habit of the old panel - putting names in a hat and pulling out the lucky one. "The more things change, the more they stay the same"

Peter
on July 18, 2012, 22:25 GMT

Amusing to read the various posts. Guys, this is a 30 man squad! Half the guys are going to miss out on selection, and to be blunt, there are only about 18 in the running for final selection, so let's not get to delirious with incredulous thoughts. How many times does this scenario have to be run before it sinks in? From the competition I have seen in the BBL last summer, the only guy who probably should be miffed is Trent Copeland. Although not having an outstanding series here, his bowling is perfectly suited to the sub continent (backed up by his miserly performances last year in SL). And he doesn't rate a mention in the final 30? This is the preliminary fluff before the event anyway, just there as an entree.

Errr... Marcio so India, UAE and Sri lanka are not in the sub continent ??, time to get yourself a map !, England are the #1 ranked T20 team ( last time i looked), does that mean they will win...no, do they have a chance... of course they do.

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 18:27 GMT

where is brad hodge. we all r known about his ability. selector could take him in place of baily. in my opinion best 15 could be warner, watson(VC), hodge. D hussey(C), m hussey, white, maxwell, paine, hogg, harris, jhonson, m marsh, cummins, s okeffe, ben hilfenhaus. i would like to take paine as a kipper in spot of wade

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 17:27 GMT

why u not make ashses cricket update version plz make for pc

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 16:02 GMT

I THINK THE AUSSIES SELECTORS AND THE PUBLIC ARE TOO MUCH CONFUSED ABOUT WHICH FAST BOWLERS SHOULD BE IN THE SQUAD,TO ME IT WILL BE A LUCK WHICH WILL DECIDE WHICH 4 OR 5 WILL GO COZ NO ONE HAVE A PERMANENT SPOT IN THE ODI OR T20 TEAM,MY FINAL 15 WILL BE:
1)WARNER,2)WATSON,3)WHITE,4)D.HUSSEY,5)M.HUSSEY,6)BAILEY,7)WADE, 8)JOHNSON,9)HARRIS,10)MCKAY,11)HOGG,12)S.SMITH,13)X.DOHERTY,14) A.FINCH/S.MARSH/T.BIRT,15)HILFENHAUS/NANNES/CUMMINGS/STARC

Glenn
on July 18, 2012, 15:23 GMT

Does it really matter who Australia pick ? they are just standing onthe shoulders of previous teams who were v good, unlike this current generation who are very average.

Marcio
on July 18, 2012, 15:17 GMT

@landlord47, you are taking things far too personally. It's not my fault England's recent performances in the sub-continent are so bad, or that your players are unsuited to the conditions, or that very few have much experience there in T20 comps. And the UAE is not the subcontinent, so that leaves a sole T20 win as evidence that what I said is wrong. Admit it, everything I wrote is indisputable. You'll just have to deal with facts in this instance.

jack
on July 18, 2012, 14:44 GMT

What a fantastic story brad Hogg is. I went and saw every Perth scorches match in Perth and the crowd just loved him, it's incredible that no one can pick his wrong 'un still! What a talent. It's great to see him get selected because he is the best spinner and not overlooked because of his age! Love ya hoggy

Randolph
on July 18, 2012, 13:01 GMT

Oh boy I heard BOllinger's name in the comments and almost had a heart attack thinking he was in the team. Heartless Doug should never have played for Australia, and its rather fitting he is playing for the State with the least spirit in Australia.

brad hogg i thought id read to wrong hes 42 is he not.i thought they meat brad hodge. i will have to check this story later to see if its a mistake. it is a mistake is it not ?

James
on July 18, 2012, 12:12 GMT

@Marcio England recent T20 form is.. Beat India at home, beat India away, beat Pakistan in UAE and beat WI at home. Not sure how that fits with your description of them as having no chance, not saying they are favorites in those conditions but England have as good a chance as anyone else.

Rajeev
on July 18, 2012, 12:10 GMT

@katandthat3: Yours is the best squad in those conditions except that Bailey can be not dropped so he could replace McDonald. Then there is also chance for Steve Smith to replace M.Marsh as the conditions are better suited for Spin. While the playing XI should be 1.Watson 2.Warner 3.S.Marsh 4.C.White 5.D.Hussey 6.M.Hussey 7.Wade 8.O'keefe 9.Hogg 10.Cummins 11.Laughlin. Then in few matches ideally S.Smith can replace either O'keefe / Shaun Marsh.

Anyhow i am guessing that Australia can not win this World Cup too.

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 12:02 GMT

Australia's downfall is poor team selection and lack of aggression by their top 6 batsmen. You will never win a game with Johnson and Steve Smith. Smith is not a bowler nor a batsman. Johnson is not a bowler. Australia's top six were choked by England because they wanted to maintain their place on the team, no matter how long it took them to score 10 runs. Where is the batting coach? Warner and Watson are not suitable as test openers. If Watson should play test he should bat at 6 up. Watson is not a century maker, need operners that can score hundreds. The bowlilng has also contributed to their downfall also. Bowling too short and too wide. Need to bowl good length on the stumps just like England.Right now Ausies have only 2 batsmen (Clarke & M Hussey) and 2 bowlers (Hilfenhaus & Harris) only because they dont bowl too short or toowide.

Allan
on July 18, 2012, 12:00 GMT

For the few people who mentioned Hughes, have you forgotten his embarrasing display against the Kiwis's a few months back, so what if he has scored a few runs at county level over the last month, that does not mean anything, he failed twice agasint the English, the selectors won't pick him again until he has had a few good shield seasons.

Khawaja
on July 18, 2012, 11:55 GMT

i think bailey might have no utility left given that his batting talent is suspect...even david warner seems to have outlived his utility as has steve smith and johnston...i also doubt they will pick, shaun, birt or finch...steady batting of watson, wade, mike, david,mitchell, cameron...okeefe, dohert, hogg, allrounder maxwell, faulkner, cummins, laughlin and mckay, starc...australia lost one day series because of the bad opening and pair and lack of a number three...have to play mike hussey at number 3...i would toss between mike hussy and watson for captain of teh one t20 squad...it will be tough picking a 15 from this sqaud...

John
on July 18, 2012, 11:28 GMT

Still trying to get over the 4-0 pounding, are we, Marcio? England beat Pakistan 2-1 in its T20 series this year and won the only T20 against India in India. I don't think England will win (and frankly I don't much care), but I think England's side is much better suited to the conditions than Australia's. BTW, Marcio, just remind me: England won the last T20 World Cup inj the WI. Who was it they beat in the final?

Andrew
on July 18, 2012, 11:22 GMT

@katandthat3 - like your squad, I think S Marsh & White with their IPL experience should put in good performances. Not really sold on the Laughlin thing though! I'd drop Laughlin for McKay. I also want Christian in the 15, but dunno who I'd drop - Watto or S Marsh (stuff the IPL) I think!

Garry
on July 18, 2012, 9:29 GMT

I quite like the squad of 30, I'll probably be less impressed with the final 15. Laughlin is a good selection, he has the variety for T20 and was impossible to get away on low slow tracks, Pattinson is still too green. They have picked a squad with the conditions of Sri Lanka in mind and that you have to be really good in at least 2 of the 3 disciplines. That will count out a few guys. Johnson is fine in the shorter formats. Wonder if they'll have the courage to leave out Bailey who is less suited to T20 (has done well in ODI's) and pick Watson, Warner or White as the skipper? This is a WC after all but if Bailey is skipper for UAE tour they would be less likely to change skippers in the WC. With thoughts to the conditions and skillsets I'd go with a 15 squad of: Warner, Watson, S Marsh, White, M Hussey, D Hussey, Wade, M Marsh, Johnson, O'Keefe, Hogg, Cummins, Laughlin, Maxwell, McDonald. All are excellent fielders, others in the 30 should get exposure in this format after the WC.

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 9:23 GMT

OMG...wat a mess is aussy saelection panel.....where is douggie bolinger.Peter siddle and braddy haddin...... ??????By the look of things , i beliv this aussie side wont be in the final four.

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 9:15 GMT

why do we bother with squads of 30. just pick the 15 and be done with it

Marcio
on July 18, 2012, 9:14 GMT

@VillageBlacksmith, its "all over the place" because it is a squad, not a team. Of all the top eight teams, I think England is the only one that has little chance of winning, especially if Pieterson isn't there. England's recent history in the sub-continent is not just bad - it's simply awful! Conditions are just unsuited to their medium pace/swing bowlers and batsmen/accumulators the same factors that make the team strong in other conditions. There is a reason why the English players are picked last of all countries' players in the IPL draft: they suck in the sub-continent!They struggled to make the WC quarters, losing to Ireland, then got done by 10 wickets to SL. They lost 0-5 in their last series in India, and struggled a to a draw with SL in the test series there. Lack of experience in conditions totally unsuited to them = no hope. Conversely AUS is chock full of players with IPL experience and success. They will be hard to beat.

Adrian
on July 18, 2012, 9:09 GMT

Why Hilfy is there I have no idea - he performed miserably in the recent English ODI series. Same for Johnson. I am also struggling to understand why Lyon was not picked. Lyon only got noticed because of his T20 performances - talk about mixed messages from the selectors! Hughes is one of the all time best T20 batsmen in Australia - of course...let's not select him. Nannes has not had a good game in over a year - yep, that makes sense - pick him. I do like McDonald being in there though, his form with the bat has been brilliant - highly underrated bowler too. For Petes' sake...how many more years of failure to we have to painfully watch of Steve Smith?

James
on July 18, 2012, 8:52 GMT

I think trendy youths would reply to this 30-man party with 'LOL'

shankar
on July 18, 2012, 8:47 GMT

I still can't understand why the out of form players like Smith, Bailey are still in the team. Watson should be appointed as 20 20 captain for Australia. It is so horrible to see Aussies losing ODI series 0-4 to England. I really feel they had lost series only due to absence of Michael Hussey.

Marcio
on July 18, 2012, 8:41 GMT

Actually there's the making of an excellent team there. I just don't think they needed to pick 30 players. Pattinson is no loss, as he just isn't suited to this format, nor these conditions. His non inclusion is logical. Tait, Bollinger, Siddle - all these guys are not crucial to the team's success. With the Hussey's, Warner, Watson, the Marsh brothers, Hogg, Maxwell, Starc (esp. if bowling in the evening on dew), this is as good as any T20 side going round, and with abundant experience in the sub-continent.

Marcio
on July 18, 2012, 8:30 GMT

Someone finally worked out that Pattinson is not a good short format bowler! I've been saying it for ages. he lacks the variety, and in the slower sub-continent pitches he would have been on a hiding to nothing with his extra pace/height - the ball would sit up nicely to be tonked over the fence. I am amazed they selected D Nannes. They kicked him out when he was at the top of his game, now bring him back when he is struggling! What the...? & now Hughes is carving it up, let's leave him out too! The truth is that T20 is a lottery. A couple of good/bad overs & the game is won/lost. Even BANG could win this. Certainly there is no clear favourite. The WI will have a good team, with Narine being well suited to the conditions & WI batsmen used to slow turners @ home. ENG will be @ the opposite end, with players least suited to sub-continent conditions - both batsmen & bowlers. Broad could break his record of being hit for 6 sixes in an over if he oversteps during a bad spell ;-)

Sukwinder
on July 18, 2012, 8:15 GMT

They should have taken Brad Hodge too :(

KH. RAFIQUE
on July 18, 2012, 8:10 GMT

I don't think AUS t20 team has any realistic chance to do well in WCT20.......AUSSIE cricket are in serious dim.........But still i would be happy if Nannes makes it to the main team......All the best>>>>

R
on July 18, 2012, 8:01 GMT

Its just all over the place.. Highly amusing, thanks for the laugh, and still they keep picking s smith & m johnson...!! Inverarity and Arthur seem made for eachother...

Aswin
on July 18, 2012, 7:44 GMT

What a stupid joke?
The bloke who made his mark primarily in t20s , who should be in the final 15, is not even in the top 30.
With the indian selectors' tenure ending this year, i think the aussies are contesting for their post:MOST BIZZARE SELECTORS

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 7:27 GMT

Interesting squad in that we can see who the selectors are watching as well as those that have been selected to go to the UAE. I guess the only thing i'm dissappointed with is that they didn't spring a surprise and name Michael Clarke. To me he would be the perfect man to lead the Aussies in this tourney, with his excellent play against spin bowling and knowledge of how to handle spin bowlers as captain and use them to take wickets, rather than bowl darts and he would also add an option for a few overs himself. But anyway we'll just have to go with what we've got. Bailey, Cummins, Harris, Hogg, Dussey, Mussey, S Marsh, Maxwell, McKay, O'Keefe, Wade, Warner, Watson would be my pick as the playing squad... i know there's room for a couple more but I can't really see anyone standing out demanding selection right now. My final xi would be Warner, Watson, Marsh, Dussey, Mussey, Wade, Maxwell, Harris, Cummins, Hogg, McKay.

Could remove Shaun Marsh, bump everyone up and bring in Mitchell Marsh, Glenn Maxwell or Steve Smith at 6 or 7.

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 7:06 GMT

Worst Aussie squad i have seen in 20 years... Old men and useless slow test players. Good luck, you're going to need plenty of it.

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 6:45 GMT

Very surprised that there was no room for Pattinson and Lyon given the sheer amount of B list bowlers found among the probables.

John
on July 18, 2012, 6:40 GMT

It's early days for Pattinson but he has obviously been significantly more impressive in Tests than limited-overs cricket. The selectors seem to have made a decision that Lyon is a Test cricketer. It does seem odd that they would throw him into Test cricket, the highest form of the game, with very little domestic cricket behind him yet not be willing to give him a run in either limited-overs format. Maybe they want to make sure that he doesn't learn to throw darts in short-form cricket before he's really mastered his art in the long form. If he doesn't play 50- or 20-over cricket for Australia though, he's going to do so for his state and/or BBL side so he will still be exposed to that environment.

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 6:28 GMT

Ben Laughlin, who lost his state contract has been selected ahead of Pattinson? What the hell is Inverarity doing? It's not often I question him, but this is stupid. Pattinson is better, end of story. Hell, I would've picked Darren Pattinson ahead of Laughlin.

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 6:22 GMT

Why was pattinson left out?? He is potentially our best bowler!! What hav nannes and laughlin done to be there?? I see why Lyon was left out because Hogg and doherty are the preffered spinners plus maxwell the allrounder adds a spin option and even o'keefe has done well in t20 when he gets a game. I probably wouldnt hav picked shuan marsh either, just on poor current form and also his dismal record for aus in t20 cricket. But this squad has to be cut in half for the WC so we will see what happens then, some of the guys i mentioned may not make the cut

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 6:06 GMT

who cares mate, auze auze auze awee awee awee

Bryn
on July 18, 2012, 5:58 GMT

i also dont get the no doug bollinger thing

Bryn
on July 18, 2012, 5:57 GMT

ben laughlin but no nathan coulter nile? these selectors are as bad as the last lot. shame on you inverarity

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 5:56 GMT

Dropping a promising fast bowler Pattinson has shocked me

Doug
on July 18, 2012, 5:34 GMT

From that list of names, they could have picked an excellent side to play England in that recent ODI series, but they didn't.

Andrew
on July 18, 2012, 5:11 GMT

The inclusion of Nannes & Loughlin are the 2 biggest surprises. Nannes is IMO past his best by a long way, & Loughlin wouldn't of been on my radar that's fo sure. I dunno what NC-N has done to members of the NSP, but last year he outpointed Loughlin in averages, wickets & S/R. I almost definately would of taken McDermott & maybe Rimmington or even Coyte. Of the batsmen, I think barring Hughes, they have picked the right ones, I'd nearly be tempted to pick Marcus North as a spin bowling allrounder option.
== == ==
Happy for Lyon & Pattinson not to be selected & for that matter Siddle, although I think Bollinger is a bit unlucky. With respect to Lyon, Patto & Sidz - they are almost definate 1st choice test bowlers & I'm happy we don't waste them in the shortest format. I think T20 has the potential to really damage a spin bowler's test prospects, by making them bowl flater. There are examples where this hasn't happenned - i.e Swann, but look almost any Indian spinner & there's the proof!

surprising when you consider that Lyon made his name as a T20 specialist, the omission of Pattinson is understandable considering the impact the tournament may have on his already fragile body and test hopes..Bollinger should have been there so also Ferguson

No Clarke, Ponting, Haddin or Siddle. All the test specialists have been left out. That's T20 cricket a game where Australia doesn't seem to take it quite seriously.

Joe
on July 18, 2012, 4:52 GMT

Well. I guess we couldn't really expect Inverarity's honeymoon period of good selection to last. *sigh*

arjun
on July 18, 2012, 4:50 GMT

Utter foolishness from Inverarity n his panel Leaving out shaun tait,bollinger,siddle ,lyon and pattinson from the initial squad. I dont understand why johnson,voges,paine r in their t-20's plans . they r not t-20 players . Its gud to c Nannes back in selectors plans . Though he is not in gud form he is the most destructive left arm quick in the shorter forms of the game . Inverarity is following Hilditch's legacy . God save Aus cricket .

Utter foolishness from Inverarity n his panel Leaving out shaun tait,bollinger,siddle ,lyon and pattinson from the initial squad. I dont understand why johnson,voges,paine r in their t-20's plans . they r not t-20 players . Its gud to c Nannes back in selectors plans . Though he is not in gud form he is the most destructive left arm quick in the shorter forms of the game . Inverarity is following Hilditch's legacy . God save Aus cricket .

Joe
on July 18, 2012, 4:52 GMT

Well. I guess we couldn't really expect Inverarity's honeymoon period of good selection to last. *sigh*

Dummy4
on July 18, 2012, 4:56 GMT

No Clarke, Ponting, Haddin or Siddle. All the test specialists have been left out. That's T20 cricket a game where Australia doesn't seem to take it quite seriously.

surprising when you consider that Lyon made his name as a T20 specialist, the omission of Pattinson is understandable considering the impact the tournament may have on his already fragile body and test hopes..Bollinger should have been there so also Ferguson

The inclusion of Nannes & Loughlin are the 2 biggest surprises. Nannes is IMO past his best by a long way, & Loughlin wouldn't of been on my radar that's fo sure. I dunno what NC-N has done to members of the NSP, but last year he outpointed Loughlin in averages, wickets & S/R. I almost definately would of taken McDermott & maybe Rimmington or even Coyte. Of the batsmen, I think barring Hughes, they have picked the right ones, I'd nearly be tempted to pick Marcus North as a spin bowling allrounder option.
== == ==
Happy for Lyon & Pattinson not to be selected & for that matter Siddle, although I think Bollinger is a bit unlucky. With respect to Lyon, Patto & Sidz - they are almost definate 1st choice test bowlers & I'm happy we don't waste them in the shortest format. I think T20 has the potential to really damage a spin bowler's test prospects, by making them bowl flater. There are examples where this hasn't happenned - i.e Swann, but look almost any Indian spinner & there's the proof!

Doug
on July 18, 2012, 5:34 GMT

From that list of names, they could have picked an excellent side to play England in that recent ODI series, but they didn't.

ABOUT COOKIES

We use cookies to help make this website better, to improve our services and for advertising purposes. You can learn more about our use of cookies and change your browser settings in order to avoid cookies by clicking here. Otherwise, we'll assume you are OK to continue.